1. Field of the Invention
The present invention generally relates to an article holder for use on a motorcycle and specifically relates to a helmet holder for supporting a helmet on a motorcycle where the helmet is supported in a cantilever position and secured there substantially by the force of gravity alone.
2. Description of the Prior Art
In the prior art there are several helmet holder devices for use on a motorcycle, as evidenced by the patents cited in compliance with the applicant's Information Disclosure Statement submitted herewith. However, no cited device alone or in combination with another offers the features and advantages of my invention and also over comes the shortcomings of the prior art devices.
One significant problem with the prior art devices is they may require the original physical structure of the helmet to be altered in order to be supported in or lock to the prior art helmet holder, such as in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,274,271 and 3,759,072 and 3,646,786. In addition to the disadvantage that once the helmet structure is altered it can never truly be returned to its original state, there is the significant safety consideration that altering the structure of the helmet is known to substantially reduce the ability of the helmet to effectively protect a rider in a crash situation. Also, it is well know that current motorcycle helmet regulations prohibit the alteration of the original physical structure of the helmet, thus making such helmet holding devices effectively unusable.
Another significant problem with the prior art devices is that they do not securely support a helmet and rather the helmet is free to dangle from the vehicle and crash into the vehicle itself as well as other objects adjacent the vehicle. Such devices are seen in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,733,805; 4,063,637; 3,823,856; 3,531,955 and 3,399,855. Aside from obvious damage that a dangling helmet can do to the other objects it may come into contact with, the helmet itself can be structurally damaged and made effectively unusable due to visibly undetectable stress cracks caused when the helmet bangs into another object. Such visibly undetectable stress cracks only become obviously detectable when it is too late, namely, when a rider wearing the structurally damaged helmet is in a vehicle crash and the rider's helmet prematurely fails upon impact with another object due to the stress cracks.
Yet another problems with the prior art devices are they do not provide a helmet holder for holding a helmet while the motorcycle is in operation on a roadway, such as seen in U.S. Pat. No. 3,896,643. It is well know that wearing a helmet is not required by law in all states and thus when a rider is in such a state he or she needs a safe and secure place to put the helmet for later use. Also, when a rider is not on his or her motorcycle he or she needs a place to put the helmet without fear of it falling or being damaged. This is especially desirable when moving the cycle short distances such as from the garage, around the gas pump, at camp sites, at bike meets, in the parking lot, etc. Additional considerations for mounting a helmet in an upright position in the front portion of a motorcycle are limited mounting space in the front portion as well as determining a mounting location that will not interfere with the other parts and accessories in the front portion, namely, a windshield, a handle bar structure, a front console, and a radio, among others, depending on the particular motorcycle.
Still other problems with the prior art devices, and in particular U.S. Pat. No. 3,896,643, is that such a device is intended to exert a substantial amount of clamping type pressure on the helmet to maintain the position of the same in the holder. Such clamping pressure unfortunately tends to significantly deform an interior surface of the helmet which is usually constructed of a cushion material that is easily deformable. Additionally, employing a clamping mechanism requires significant surface area contact between the clamping member and an outside painted surface of the helmet. This contact often results in scratching or marring the outside painted surface.
These and other types of helmet holders disclosed in the prior art do not offer the flexibility and inventive features of my Helmet Holder For Use On A Motorcycle. As will be described in greater detail hereinafter, the disclosed and claimed features of the present invention differs from those previously proposed.